Opinion
January 5, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.).
Defendant failed to allege any material misrepresentation of existing fact which would support a claim of fraud (see, Lane v McCallion, 166 A.D.2d 688, 690). The existence of other litigation challenging this zoning ordinance (One Beekman Place v. City of New York, 169 A.D.2d 492) was a matter of public knowledge which defendant could have discovered through the exercise of ordinary diligence had he made inquiry at the appropriate time (see, 88 Blue Corp. v. Reiss Plaza Assocs., 183 A.D.2d 662, 664). Plaintiffs, in any event, had no duty to disclose the existence of the ongoing litigation as there was no fiduciary or confidential relationship between the parties (see, Lane v McCallion, supra, at 691). We additionally find that the motion court did not abuse its discretion in declining to award sanctions.
Concur — Asch, J.P., Rubin, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.